Re: [PATCH] scheduler cleanup

Andrea Arcangeli (andrea@suse.de)
Thu, 14 Oct 1999 21:20:40 +0200 (CEST)


On Thu, 14 Oct 1999, Artur Skawina wrote:

>Andrea is as usual wrong. RTFS. I'm always thankful for any bugreports,
>but i'm not going to fix imaginary bugs, obviously. [if anyone feels

Your one is a bug, no way. That is why I didn't bothered to look too much
thorugh the code. It's obvious. You can't depend on reschedule_idle.

>[*] the behaviour, while it may not have been intentional, seems to be

The current behaviour is _intentional_ and I implemented it carefully in
June. The algorithm I described in the previous email could be used for
real too. I experimented with it while developing the current code infact.

> mostly right. yes, this also means that the other "bug" mentioned
> by Andrea in this thread does not exist either.

Wrong. The other fix I mentioned is real but it applyes to CPUs that are
running SCHED_OTHER tasks (but running SCHED_OTHER). The SCHED_OTHER tasks
should be rescheduled immediatly, without my fix instead the scheduler may
force a RT task to wait the SCHED_OTHER task to reschedule. Not a big
issue but it _exists_.

Andrea

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/